Featured Article

The intensification of suburbs: examples from the Greater Toronto Area

If one thinks of the stereotypical North
American suburb, images that often come to mind are large single-story tract
housing, cul-de-sacs, parking lots, wide roads and shopping malls. In short,
developments built at a low density and often described as urban sprawl. While
this is how many suburbs begin, it is important to note that their development
is not a static process. In fact, if we look at many suburban areas today, we
can clearly see a trajectory of development which, over time, can transform
them from sprawling developments into urban neighbourhoods. To illustrate this
point, several suburbs from in and around Toronto will be used as examples.

Some of the first suburbs to emerge in
North America were built at the start of the Twentieth Century. Concentrated
along roads which radiated out from city centres, they gave the city a
star-shaped form and were named ‘Streetcar suburbs’ for the mode of transport
which was central to their development. Their urban form was significantly
different from the dense cities they left behind: apartments, row houses and
duplexes were replaced by larger detached and semi-detached housing, and
functions were separated so that factories were no longer situated right beside
housing.

Over time, streetcar suburbs intensified
and the densities increased. In some cases, the streetcar lines were replaced
by rapid transit, which led to further densification around stations. Some major
intersections which began as low rise shopping corners have become transformed
into major destinations. Gradually, the moniker of ‘suburb’ was replaced with
that of ‘urban.’ North Toronto, the area where I grew up, is one such example
of an early suburb evolving into a fully fledged urban neighbourhood. It
developed in the 1920s when a trolley line was extended beyond the old city
limits. After World War II, density increased along the major thoroughfares,
particularly at large intersections. This was stimulated by a subway line which
opened in 1954.

Streetcar suburbs were not generally
built with the car as the primary means of transport (though there were
numerous provisions, such as driveways and wider roads, which were taken into
account). What about the post-war suburbs, which were planned for one- and
two-car households? In many such suburbs, we can see similar processes of
intensification taking place, albeit often very slowly.

The early post-war suburbs (now known as
the inner-suburbs) of Toronto began their lives like many North American
communities built in the twenty-five years after World War II. They featured
low-density, single-family houses and acted as bedroom communities for the city
proper.The region’s first shopping malls emerged around major intersections and
highways allowed commuters to travel downtown quickly. When they were first
built, there were no subway or streetcar lines, and the population had to rely
on either slow feeder buses taking them to the ends of the subway lines, or
their private cars (the more popular of which was the latter, of course).
However, like all communities, once the initial construction was completed,
they began to evolve and change.

Some of the first changes to take place
were the construction of high-rise apartments, often located along major roads
or near highway exits. While some of these buildings were constructed concomitant
with the single-family houses, many more were built in the subsequent years and
decades. This gave the landscape clusters of density surrounded by sprawl.From
the late 1960s, the subway was expanded into these suburbs, and, like the
process seen with the streetcar suburbs, densities began to spike around
stations. Land use slowly became more mixed, and development more vertical than
horizontal, so that nodes which featured not only high-rise houses, but also
offices, shopping, recreational and cultural amenities could be seen Rather
than being bedroom communities, they started to become destinations in and of
themselves. The Yonge Street subway extension into North York (the area beyond
North Toronto) in the 1970s is a good example of this transition. When the
suburb developed in the 1950s, Yonge Street was characterised by low-rise strip
malls and small low-rise apartments. Today, high rise condominiums and offices
dominate the street and it has become a destination for theatre and movies.
Similar intensification of post-war suburbs can be found around Metro stations around
Washington DC.

In the first two examples, it was rapid
transit which was a major catalyst for the increased density of the suburbs. But
can we see evidence of this trajectory without subways? Mississauga, a large
suburb to the west of Toronto, is currently experiencing this process. The
suburb is the largest in the Greater Toronto Area, and is in fact the sixth
largest municipality of Canada, with a population of over 650,000. Its first
phases of development were also characterised by low-density sprawl, typical of
most North American suburbs since 1970. Few high rises punctured the skyline of
bungalows and duplexes and the suburb lacked a distinctive core or central
place. Office parks, shopping malls and sprawling factories dominated the rest
of the landscape.

However, by the end of the 1990s,
Mississauga faced a problem: it ran out of land. Most of the land within its
boundaries had been developed in typical sprawl style and there was very little
farmland left to develop into houses, offices or factories. The boundaries of
the suburb could not be expanded because it was surrounded on three sides by
other communities and by Lake Ontario to the south. If developments were to
continue, they would have to go upward, rather than outward.

The most logical place for higher
density development was surrounding the major shopping mall, and new Civic
Centre, which opened in 1987. Built to look like a futuristic farmstead, when
it opened, it was one of the few buildings of any height in Mississauga. Since
then, it has been dwarfed by high-rise condominium and office developments in
its vicinity, as well as cultural and recreational facilities. While it is
still suburban in nature, Mississauga City Centre is a ‘downtown’ of sorts and
densities rival those of some urban areas.

Originally, suburbs were built almost
exclusively of single-family dwellings. There were few provisions for groups
such as singles, childless couples or the elderly. By having a range of housing
styles, groups such as first-time buyers who grew up in the suburbs, or
empty-nesters who raised their children there, now have the opportunity to
spend more of their housing careers in the suburbs. Developers clearly see a
market for this type of suburban housing, and planners and politicians are also
keen to cash in on condominium projects without having to spend money on
extending municipal infrastructure into undeveloped farmland.

The increased density currently being
seen in Mississauga has also affected demand for public transit. As we have
seen with earlier suburban expansion, subway and streetcar construction spurred
the intensification of the suburbs and the gradual transition from suburb into
city neighbourhood. However densities already have increased so much in parts
of Mississauga that plans are being made for light rail lines in order to
relieve overcrowded bus lines. These will provide better links to its own
downtown, as well as with the city of Toronto proper.

Many urbanites do not like the suburbs.
From an environmental perspective, they can be very unsustainable. However, the
suburbs are not going to go away. They remain popular places for those who live
there, and developments geared to low-density, auto dependence have been a part
of our landscape for more than eighty years. They are where the majority of
inhabitants living in a metropolitan area live. But suburbs, like the city, are
not static. They evolve and grow over time. For a suburb to evolve into a more
urban environment, this growth needs to be more upward, rather than outward. There
is a large opportunity to help suburbs evolve into sustainable communities
where the car is not the only option, and different uses and functions can find
their own place. History has shown that this has already happened in other
parts of the city.

We have a great chance to influence the
future patterns of existing communities. It is clear that less car-dependent neighbourhoods
are essential to a sustainable and liveable future. This does not mean
destroying existing suburbs, but it does require planning, infrastructure and
commitment. Developers have clearly seen a market for higher-density dwellings
around suburban nodes. Politicians and planners must work to ensure that the
types of development which take place help to create liveable communities. If
this is done correctly, previous examples have shown us that the single-use,
low-density, car-dependent suburbs of our parents and grandparents can evolve
into urban neighbourhoods.

The impact of a subway line on a
streetcar suburb from the early 20th Century is obvious. Around
stations, high rises offices and condominiums have created a new destination,
and the area is now an urban neighbourhood. When the intersection of Yonge and
Eglinton was first developed in the 1920s, one- and two-story buildings were
the norm.

In early post-war suburbs, the impact of
transit improvements can also be seen. Yonge Street in North York has fully
developed into a more urban, rather than suburban space (photo Michael Doucet).

Intensification can also be seen in the
car-dependent suburbs built after 1970. The Mississauga Civic Centre
(second building from the left with the small clock tower) is now dwarfed by
condominium developments, giving the suburb its own distinctive skyline.
Development has been so concentrated that plans for rapid transit are being
developed to meet demand and ease congestion (photo Michael Doucet).